Orszag: No global warming dispute

Republicans and business lobbyists believe a memo from the Office of Management and Budget is a “smoking gun” that proves that the Environmental Protection Agency was playing politics when it proposed regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

The unsigned, nine-page OMB memo says that EPA's assessment ignored significant scientific and economic questions, and it warns that the agency’s findings could have “serious economic consequences,” particularly for small businesses.

Story Continued Below

But the OMB is pushing back, saying the memos are being taken out of context. In a blog post, OMB Director Peter Orszag said his agency's memo was simply a collection of criticism gathered from multiple agencies and does not reflect any administration conflict over the EPA finding.

“These collected comments were not necessarily internally consistent, since they came from multiple sources, and they do not necessarily represent the views of either OMB or the administration," wrote Orszag. "In general, passing along these types of comments to an agency proposing a finding often helps to improve the quality of the notice."

OMB reviewed the finding several weeks ago and found it "carefully rooted in both law and science," wrote Orszag.

EPA administrator Lisa Jackson told the Senate Environment and Public Works committee Tuesday that her agency’s finding was a "scientific analysis" ordered in a 2007 Supreme Court ruling. The analysis was done before Jackson took office, she said, although her staff did review it.

"It's deliberative so obviously it's people's opinions," she said.

Republicans obviously like the opinions expressed in the OMB memo.

"This is a smoking gun saying that your findings were political — not scientific," said Sen. John Barrasso, (R-Wyo.) in a Senate hearing on Tuesday.

Last month, EPA found that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were a danger to human health and welfare, overturning several years of inaction by the Bush administration. The decision was hailed by environmentalists because it could open the door to regulating whole sectors of the economy including auto manufactures, power plants, and a wide swath of other greenhouse gas emitting industries.

The EPA finding also puts pressure on Democrats in Congress to pass climate change legislation before international climate talks in December. Otherwise the EPA could act without legislation, something congressional leaders want to avoid.

Reps. Henry Waxman, (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey, (D-Mass.) are expected to unveil an energy and climate bill this week.

In a January hearing before the Senate committee, Jackson said that the EPA finding "will indeed trigger the beginning of regulation of CO2."

But on Tuesday, she said that the finding "does not mean regulation."

"We make regulations smartly to address the threats in the best way possible and with an eye to understanding we don't want to unduly effect those who can least afford to pay," she said. "The regulatory process allows us the opportunity to make those decisions and to do it but we're not at that point yet."

Business groups cheered the OMB memo on Tuesday, heralding it as exposing EPA's political motives.

"The memo confirms nearly everything we've been saying about the negative ripple effect throughout the economy-particularly the harm to small businesses," said Bill Kovacs, vice president of environment, technology and regulatory affairs at the Chamber of Commerce.

Scott Segal, a utility lobbyist at Bracewell Giuliani, warned that the EPA may have "cherry-picked public health literature."

"Even the appearance that EPA might have prejudiced the endangerment finding undermines that important commitment," he said in a statement.